entry suits that help provide us a measure of survivability. finally this is the part that they get to fly the shuttle in at the end. it shows about 24,000 feet and 290 knots. now we are about 13,000 feet and you can see the runway at kennedy space center. looks like we are dive bombing the runway where we do a massive pull up. the pilot drops the gear, very important part of the mission as you dot final preps for landing. we are still going about 200 knots when we land. that's one of the reasons we

deploy a drag chute added part way through to make the landings safer and prevent wear and tear on the tires and brakes and make the roll out safe. we have a three-mile long runway at kennedy space center for that. that was sts 110. now i would like to transition a little bit to the space station today. it's a partnership of five space agencies, 15 countries. it has been continuously inhabited for over 11 years and close to a million pounds of hardware and space. dimensions are larger than a football field. a pressurized volume equivalent to a five-bedroom home. 200 people have lived or visited there on assembly missions. that's nicole, one of the astronauts giving us a tour. this is the u.s. laboratory.

as you go to the russian side, this is the main service module where they do a lot of their these butterflies and followed by spiders are part of educational program that can be replicated in kindergarten and k-12th grade classes. we can understand how butterflies and spiders operate differently in space and on earth. same with plant growth, trying to understand how plants sense gravity and not only to understand plant development for future missions, but here on earth. these are nano racks that can hold experiments designed by high school students. we were studying the approach of

seeds and a lot of what we do is focused on biomedical experiments to focus on how it is. they need special exercise and resistive exercise to prevent bone loss. we have to do things like our immune systems change and more about that. the components that hold through the medicine change in space due to radiation exposure. this is a freezer that keeps samples at ultra cold temperatures and preserved them to be looked at on earth. one of the -- the fundamental

experiment that is trying to detect anti-matter and dog matter and cosmic rays. it's our measure more than 12 million cosmic rays since may. this is the first humanoid robot in space. this happened just a couple of weeks ago. the first humanoid hand shake in space. looking at that for the future. this is our window on the world. one of the last modules up there. this is a spectacular view of the war and this is night time views. in mexico, the thunderstorm activity and florida here. this is the east coast and spectacular views. finally one over the middle of the country and dark areas that are the great lakes. you can see chicago is that big

bright spot there. this is both to help with robotic activities and view the earth. as this movie finishes up, we can go online at any time and figure out when to view where you live. it's a bright star in the sky as long as you have a clear night. i looked for one of the best sightings for colorado springs and next thursday, march 1st if you are outside at 6:43 p.m. it's in the west northwest direction above the ro hiz on and get up to about 75 degrees. it should be about a five-minute pass. if it's a clear night, i hope you will look out and think about the human space flight program and for some of you,

that will be in the future as well. thank you very much and would be happy to take any questions now. >> thank you so much for your message. the bizdom today will be invaluable. on behalf of our 2012 participants and the united states air force academy, we would like to present you with a small token of appreciation. if you would like to speak to the doctor, she will be available at stage right. we extend our thanks to the association of graduates, class of 1973 and all others who

through generosity make it possible. additionally there buses running every 20 minutes from the front of arnold hall, dr. fairchild hall and back to arnold hall. thank you. >> this past week we have been featuring welcome programs in prime time here on c-span 3 and we look at african-americans's resistance to slavery. the and escape of former slave, robert smalls who served south carolina. vanderbilt professor richard black et details how slaves planned and executed to canada, mexico and the caribbean. american history and prime time tonight here on c-span throw. on c-span 2 we have been featuring book tv's programs in prime time.

our conversation with pulitzer prize winner and novelist anna kwind len prime time on c-span 2. this weekend head to the state capital with book tv and american history in jefferson city, missouri at noon eastern. literary on c-span 2, former senator and missouri first lady, jean carnahan. from the book, if walls could talk. a business contract, a provisions list from ancient mesopotam mesopotamia. the stories behind eight miniature tablets and sunday at 5:00 eastern on american history tv. >> at one time, 1967 this was called the bloodiest seven acres in america. >> it takes you through the missouri state penitentiary and

walk back through history in the halls of the state capital and governor's mansion. they explore the cities across america. this weekend from jefferson city, saturday at noon and sunday at 5:00 eastern on c-span 2 and 3. >> we pulled in around 9:30 and had more of the ship to appear. >> the former commanding officer kirk lip old ald the event that left 17 dead and 37 injured. >> i was doing routine paperwork when at 11:18 there was a thunderous explosion. you could feel all 505 people and tons of destroyer go up to the right. we seem to hang for a second in the air as the ship was doing this odd twisting and flexing. we came back down in the water and lights went down and ceiling

tiles popped out and everything lifted up about a foot and slammed back down. i grabbed the underside of my desk in a brace position until the ship stopped moving. >> more with front burner author and commander kirk lip old at 8:00 on c-span's q&a. >> they look at government bureaucracy. the discussion focuses on executive power and the constitution and power. they include law school professors and clinton, bush, and obama officials. this is an hour and 45 minutes. >> welcome become and thank you for joining us for our third panel. you will be happy to know that

the professor did get his photo shoot and turns out vice president cheney did not. we will still have that for posterity. this panel is going to be -- i have to make an announcement. two of our panelists will be selling their new books during the lunch hour. you can research them here and sign it. this panel is moderated by judge thomas. you have this more than your packets. jeff griffith was appointed to the court of appeals by george w. bush in 2 thousand 5. he has a ba for brigham young university and the jd is from the university cool of law. most notably they were the proud parents of six children.

they were at stanford two weeks ago for the conference and at least i don't know if it was us or the weather, but something enticed him to come back a second time. >> it's a pleasure to be here and my congratulations to the conference organizers and thanks to ed and barbara, but i wish -- i was out here two weeks ago with the comment that the d.c. surround worked. for those of you who are in the batherings, this is the obligatory panel that seems to be the drainage to federalist societies that organizers have everywhere. at least by the conservatives in power. the three inviting words in the

constitution, the executive power. as the moderator of this distinguished panel, i plan on being seen more than heard, but i feel obliged to answer a question. judge silverman would want me to answer before going further. what are you doing on a panel about executive power. my colleague is on a circuit and made two assumptions about me, neither of which is correct. my time has set up the legal council and predisposes me to go between the political branches. it means i must know to mitt romney. about that first assumption. the fact that i once had an obication.

how best to use the powers does not mean the experience of the executive power for the constitutional scheme that they display such appreciation. the call with the senate leadership committed to showing more respect to the office of the president than mr. clinton had. for judge silverman and like-minded skeptics, i assure you that i have no bias here. i do know that the powers of congress come first in the constitution. as you have seen from your materials, we have assembled the distinguished panel today. departing from the pattern used last evening, i will provide a brief introduction to all the panelists at once and then turn the time over to them.

we first have a professor from the law school who has written hundreds of articles and book reviews. if i can add something personal, his scholarship was of special interest of this member of the panel that first considered the case that was to be counted. we are not here to talk about that. the professor is the author of five books including 51 constitutions and the crisis of governance. that was referred to before. among his most recent publications on the executive power is a 2010 article in the minnesota law review. the constitutional dictatorship and the i first met the professor and

the professors are synonymous with the robust and muscular understanding of the executive power. he is published on foreign affairs and the national security of constitution law and served in all three branches of government. deputy assistant attorney general and general council to the committee and a law clerk for silverman for justice thomas. the professor is stanford local. grat to have the strong representation for the faculty and we appreciate him being here. they focus on law and executive power and how they implement responsibilities regarding public health and safety. migration and international security in a changing world. in 2010, the professor was appointed to the administrative conference to the united states. last but certainly not least the

professor who is the james madison distinguished professor of law at the university of virginia. that's a virginia thing. i guess they are not well-represented here today. professor harrison said teaching stuff that is included in constitutional history and federal courts. he served as deputy assistant in the office of legal council and clerk for judge robert bourque on the d.c. circuit. he was on leave from the law school to serve as counsellor on international law and the office of the legal adviser at the u.s. department of state in 2008. today's panel is titled czars, libya, and recent developments perspectives on executive power. we settled on a slightly more

narrow theme of the relationship between the constitutional design. we broke down the issue into three questions. first, how does the constitution distribute power that is executive in nature. second, what are the benefits and problems of such a constitutional design, and third, what might an ideal constitutional design look like? to give each panelist sufficient time, i will vigorously monitor the time limits. we are going to ask each to speak for ten minutes and rather than passing notes, i would announce when one empty is left. because i favor him, i will not cut you off mid-syllable. with that in mind, i turn the floor over to professor levin to begin the discussion.

>> i want to join the discussion. with regard to the time of the original panel and that can go very quickly, one of the reasons i think this may not break down the unusually predictable liberal lines, i tend to share the views of my good friend that it is very unfortunate development to have more and more czars appointed. i do think that the reason for more and more czars and the failure by the senate to give timely hearings and people up and down and we can talk about that. i don't think the rise of the czars is anything to be proud about. i disagree with the robust reading of the war power by the yielding herald and i therefore

disagree with a number of things that john has written. we can always talk about recent developments and recess appointments and stuff like that. it was something to talk about in part because this is our central interest these days. i want to try to tie it to both of the panels we had. the one last night on other things and one of the things i found fascinating on the panel was the degree of radicalism shown by my good friend mike mcconnell who is probably not usually described as a radical. but i think that the judge professor michael did touch on

some absolutely crucial issues that are central on our particular topic. perhaps they are exemplified by the discussions on the great debate of the 1960 no, sir china over the issue of red. that is to what degree particularly is a modern state and last night i do think even rich waved the flag of surrender with regard to the existence of a very significant administrative state that will engage in a wide degree of rule making and as several of the speakers have articulated carefully, the debate is how should the rules be made and

what is the relevant trade off between looking to land this kind of experts or to looking either at the democratic critique of the administration or to the analogy. it's not the most at large, but a particular portion of the dmos with the correct values. that's rather than the articulation for rational news ends relationships to how you get there where expert knowledge can be relevant. there is one other way in which i appreciated michael's radicalism and think that it's not far enough. michael called for two things. the first was basic reform of

congressional organization which i strongly agree with. he has talked about the filibuster rules and other aspects of congressional organization. he also suggested and several other speakers suggested it's time to return to the procedure act and ask if an act drafted in the mid 40s still serves as well 60 years later. i'm not a professor in administrative law and i'm not noted in the opinions of the appropriatures, but what i applaud is michael's injunction that we actually look with a critical eye at whether it is fit for our present government. what has become my hobby horse in recent years is i think we should have the same spirit of

crude me in towards the constitution of the united states. we could have an argument and would not be productive. i think with regard to the dewaits about executive power and the views of the critics, it's like a comedian's convention in which we can shout out a member. i am willing to stipulate something i in fact don't really believe, but i wanted to stipulate for the sake of argument that john gets it right. that in fact it was designed to bring the president with the powers of han berry and kings. whey would ask them to think about is even if again by stipulation perhaps there was reason to do that in 1787. does it make much sense today if we were designing a constitution

anew? one thing about han berry and kings is they are adults. there was no reason for the american revolution frankly other than that george iii was one of the most innept kings of all time. if he was more politically astute, for example, there is every reason to think we ended up like that. that bloody and disruptive war. i am not glad we are independent, but if is making analogies, certainly it doesn't -- there a lot of things wrong and they are not selected. one of the questions i have that we ought to spend much more time talking about is whatever you

think the executive power means. for purposes of this panel, i am willing to defer with john. is the modern president likely to be somebody to whom we defer as much as we do cross the spectrum of say commander in chief, chief economist, chief public health officer of the country, chief disaster specialist. frankly it seems to me the answer is no. presidents of the united states are perhaps very extreme examples of not reds, but amateurs versus experts with regard to say the commander in chief power. the last president in whom i have genuine confidence to be

commander in chief was eisenhower. that's no coincidence. he was the facto commander in chief of the greatest military defeat in history. frankly in spite of my own politics, i ended that book relieved that ike beat stevenson for the presidency because ike was able to stand up to the military. since then we had a string of presidents, some whom you might like and some of what do you mean you don't. i'm not a fan of george w. bush and i was horrified over the things he wrote about presidential power. in terms of their capacity to be commander in chief. all of them are right.

these people make the decisions peace and war, life and death and shift the financial crisis, one of the most interesting books on that was written right now and the decisions, whether you like it or not, the decisions were made by the fed and they know something about the economy. is next to nowhere to be seen in this book and nobody in the reviews has suggested that hoo got it wrong. frankly i am assures. then let's say either push or obama whom i supported with

great pleasure. that's before the gavel comes down. one of the things i found bizarre about last night's very, very interesting panel is the assumption that in talking about the line item veto, there is only one constitution in the united states. i am going to stipulate that they got it right as a positive constitutional law that the constitution doesn't allow the line item veto. i think it's bizarre that we don't even talk about the fact that most states have the line item veto. most states reject executive. that's an aberration of one of the 51 constitutions of the united states. especially the elite law schools. the higher you